Comments on: Las Vegas cooling off for UFC is becoming a pattern

By: Alan Conceicao

Alan Conceicao — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 03:40:00 +0000

As I’ve said a million times before: “good show” and “good fights” are a pretty subjective criteria, and if you want to care about something strongly enough, you can make yourself do so. All I know is that if you put a comparable PPV on for boxing and had similar results to the fights, it would be eaten alive as a utter failure of the sport and proof of boxing’s irrelevancy and self destructive behavior.

By: EJ

EJ — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 03:34:43 +0000

“Does it being financially successful mean it was a good show?”

No, but the fact is it was a good show with good fighst and it was financially successful on top of that.

Not much more you can ask for of a show destroyed by injuries and bashed by hardcores.

By: Jimmy

Jimmy — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 19:25:26 +0000

Ticket prices are way too high and weak cards have not helped. Did they make another genius move by selling 10% of UFC to make up for this?

By: Alan Conceicao

Alan Conceicao — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:10:48 +0000

I don’t know why its assumed that UFC 110 will do particularly well as a PPV. Who on that card has drawn PPV buys on their own?

As for the “double standard”, by the standards set for themselves, the numbers were very low. Was it a financial success? Sure, which is why they will keep on booking PPVs without fights in the future. Does it being financially successful mean it was a good show? Sure, as much as it means that N’Sync’s No Strings Attached was the best studio record of the last ten years, which is to say its a logical fallacy.

By: EJ

EJ — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 06:53:06 +0000

Yeah you have to love the double standard when it comes to the UFC, a show with almost no draw, tons of injuries and no hype did 2 mill at the gate and around 300k buys on ppv.

Poor UFC how can they ever make money by doing such poor numbers, what a joke this is the reason I can’t take some people seriously.

There seems to be no context to anything just people spitting out their hate and bias against the UFC while propping up their competition which no one knows how they are able to pay for all those fighters while not making ppv profits.

By: JJ

JJ — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 00:03:54 +0000

UFC 107 does 600,000+

UFC 108 does 250,000 – 270,000 and the sky is falling? haha.

UFC 109 will do low numbers also. “OMG Proof that the UFC has peaked and is on the way down.” UFC 109 is the last card affected by the freak amount of injuries.

UFC 110 will be the first card to benefit from the injuries.

Take a breath. Chill. The PPV numbers are going to be good from UFC 110 on.

By: Fluyid

Fluyid — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 03:01:47 +0000

I know, I know. I’m just stating what I’d like. I would also like a few million bucks to fall my way and that ain’t gonna happen either.

By: Alan Conceicao

Alan Conceicao — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:43:53 +0000

The numbers are going to have to be a lot worse than this to dissuade them from doing PPVs. Like, UFCs will probably have to dip into the 50,000s before that happens.

By: Fluyid

Fluyid — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:17:59 +0000

“They need to stick to 12 PPV’s a year maximum.”

I fully agree. I’d hope for 10 PPV’s a year, but 12 is good as well. It would actually make a PPV seem like something to look forward to again.

By: Alan Conceicao

Alan Conceicao — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:11:21 +0000

UFC fans need to have a decent card to be interested? Get out of town. And all this time I kept hearing the brand sold 1.6 million PPVs for UFC 100!